Abstract
The Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2 (BREQ-2) is one of the most widely utilized psychometric instruments in exercise psychology, designed to assess the multidimensional continuum of behavioral regulation toward physical exercise. Grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and specifically Organismic Integration Theory (OIT), the instrument was developed by David Markland and Vicki J. Tobin in 2004 as an extension of the original BREQ (Mullan, Markland, & Ingledew, 1997). The BREQ-2 addresses a key psychometric limitation of the original version by incorporating a distinct four-item subscale to capture amotivation, alongside the existing dimensions of external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation, and intrinsic regulation.
Comprising 19 self-report items measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (“Not true for me”) to 4 (“Very true for me”), the BREQ-2 yields both multidimensional profile scores across five behavioral regulations and a composite index known as the Relative Autonomy Index (RAI). Confirmatory factor analyses across diverse athletic, clinical, and general demographic cohorts consistently validate its five-factor oblique structure, exhibiting favorable goodness-of-fit indices (e.g., CFI > .95, SRMR < .06, RMSEA < .06) and robust internal consistency reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s alphas ranging from .73 to .86). The scale serves as a foundational diagnostic and empirical tool for predicting exercise adoption, physical activity adherence, well-being outcomes, and intervention efficacy.
Keywords
Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2, BREQ-2, Self-Determination Theory, Exercise Motivation, Amotivation, External Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Identified Regulation, Intrinsic Motivation, Relative Autonomy Index, Psychometrics, Physical Activity Adherence
Authors
The Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2 was developed and psychometrically validated by:
- David Markland, PhD — Professor of Exercise Psychology at the School of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Bangor University, Wales, United Kingdom. Dr. Markland’s seminal research focuses on the application of Self-Determination Theory to exercise adoption, motivational interviewing, and psychometric measurement in health-related contexts.
- Vicki J. Tobin, MSc — Research associate and exercise psychologist at the School of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Bangor University, Wales, United Kingdom.
The instrument directly builds upon the original BREQ formulated by Elaine Mullan, David Markland, and David K. Ingledew (1997) at Bangor University.
Purpose
The fundamental purpose of the BREQ-2 is to quantify the qualitative reasons underlying an individual’s decision to engage in, maintain, or avoid physical exercise. Rather than viewing human motivation purely as a quantitative, unitary entity (i.e., how much motivation an individual possesses), the modern psychometrics of exercise behavior emphasizes qualitative differentiation (i.e., the type of motivation driving behavioral enactment). Within the framework of Self-Determination Theory, motivation is conceptualized along a dynamic self-determination continuum that reflects varying degrees of behavioral autonomy, volition, and personal endorsement.
Prior to the introduction of the BREQ-2, the original 15-item BREQ assessed four points along this continuum: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic regulation. However, during the initial instrument development, items designed to measure amotivation (the complete absence of intentionality or perceived competence) exhibited severe skewness and floor effects in typical exercise-facility samples, leading to their removal. Consequently, the original BREQ was unable to differentiate between individuals who held non-self-determined motives and those who were completely amotivated, severely restricting its utility in clinical trials, sedentary adult interventions, and primary-care physical activity referral schemes where non-engagement and amotivation predominate.
To overcome this limitation, Markland and Tobin (2004) re-engineered the questionnaire by generating and validating a new bank of amotivation items specifically contextualized to general physical exercise. The resulting 19-item BREQ-2 allows researchers, physical therapists, clinical psychologists, and health practitioners to:
- Accurately detect states of amotivation and external coercion in clinical, rehabilitative, and sedentary cohorts.
- Monitor longitudinal motivational shifts as participants progress from controlled to autonomous behavioral regulation during health-behavior change programs.
- Calculate composite indices of autonomous functioning to evaluate the efficacy of interventions grounded in motivational interviewing and autonomy-supportive coaching.
- Examine the structural relationships between the satisfaction of basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) and objective physical activity biomarkers.
Psychological Construct
The BREQ-2 captures behavioral regulation across five primary psychological dimensions, arrayed along the Self-Determination Continuum from non-autonomous (heteronomous) to highly autonomous (self-determined) regulations:
1. Amotivation
Amotivation represents a state characterized by the absence of intentionality, behavioral agency, and personal meaning regarding exercise participation. According to Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan, amotivated individuals perceive no contingency between their actions and desired outcomes; they experience pervasive feelings of incompetence or perceive the behavior as having zero personal utility. On the BREQ-2, amotivation is operationalized through statements reflecting complete detachment, incomprehension of exercise necessity, and the perception of physical activity as a futile endeavor (e.g., “I don’t see the point in exercising”; “I think exercising is a waste of time”).
2. External Regulation
External regulation denotes the most prototypical form of controlled extrinsic motivation. Here, behavioral initiation and maintenance are dictated entirely by external contingencies, such as the pursuit of tangible rewards, the avoidance of social sanctions, or compliance with intense interpersonal pressure from spouses, peers, or medical practitioners. Individuals governed by external regulation experience their behavior as heteronomous and coerced. Example indicators on the BREQ-2 include: “I exercise because other people say I should” and “I feel under pressure from my friends/family to exercise”.
3. Introjected Regulation
Introjected regulation represents a partially internalized form of controlled motivation where the behavioral contingencies are enforced internally rather than externally. The individual acts to satisfy contingent self-esteem, appease internal pressure, protect their ego, or prevent pervasive feelings of guilt, shame, and failure. Although the motivational locus operates within the individual’s psychological boundary, it remains phenomenologically alien to the self, characterized by internal coercion (the “shoulds” and “oughts” of exercise). Items assessing introjection include: “I feel guilty when I don’t exercise” and “I feel ashamed when I miss an exercise session”.
4. Identified Regulation
Identified regulation is an autonomous form of extrinsic motivation wherein the individual consciously values the underlying consequences, personal benefits, and outcomes of physical exercise. Although the activity may not be inherently enjoyable in itself, it is embraced because it serves personally meaningful goals, such as enhanced health, longevity, physical functionality, or vital energy. Identified individuals experience high self-endorsement and volitional willingness. Within the BREQ-2, this construct is tapped by items such as: “I value the benefits of exercise” and “It’s important to me to exercise regularly”.
5. Intrinsic Regulation
Intrinsic regulation occupies the pinnacle of self-determination. It describes behavioral enactment that is entirely driven by the inherent pleasures, sensory sensations, intellectual challenges, and spontaneous satisfaction derived from the activity itself. Exercising becomes an autotelic experience undertaken for its own sake, without needing separate instrumental reinforcement. The BREQ-2 captures intrinsic motivation with items like: “I exercise because it’s fun” and “I get pleasure and satisfaction from participating in exercise”.
Theoretical Framework
The BREQ-2 is systematically anchored in Self-Determination Theory (SDT), a macro-theory of human personality, motivation, and psychological flourishing developed by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. Specifically, the instrument is operationalized through the theoretical tenets of Organismic Integration Theory (OIT), a sub-theory within SDT that addresses the differentiation of extrinsic motivation and the psychological processes through which individuals internalize societal values and behavioral regulations.
According to OIT, extrinsic motivation is not an invariant, universally negative construct. Instead, human beings possess an innate, organismic tendency toward psychological growth and integration, whereby ambient social norms and non-intrinsically appealing behaviors can be progressively internalized into the self-concept. This internalization exists along a continuum defined by the degree of perceived locus of causality (PLOC):
- External PLOC: Amotivation and External Regulation, wherein behavior is driven by impersonal or external forces.
- Internal PLOC: Identified Regulation, Integrated Regulation, and Intrinsic Motivation, wherein the individual acts as the primary author and volitional initiator of their conduct.
- Intermediate PLOC: Introjected Regulation, which represents internal control without true structural integration.
The theoretical model posits that as behavior shifts toward higher self-determination along this continuum, it becomes associated with superior psychological persistence, greater behavioral fidelity, elevated subjective vitality, reduced performance anxiety, and enhanced overall psychological well-being. By mapping onto this continuum, the BREQ-2 allows psychometricians to test classic SDT predictions, including the simplex hypothesis, which asserts that adjoining regulatory subscales along the continuum will correlate more positively with one another than regulations positioned further apart.
Validity
The structural, convergent, and discriminant validity of the BREQ-2 has been corroborated extensively through rigorous psychometric testing across global exercise psychology research:
Construct and Simplex Pattern Validity
In the seminal validation study by Markland and Tobin (2004), involving a diverse sample of adult exercisers, inter-factor correlations exhibited an exemplary quasi-simplex pattern conformant with OIT theoretical assertions. Subscales situated adjacently on the self-determination continuum displayed positive, moderate-to-strong correlations (e.g., Identified Regulation correlated strongly with Intrinsic Motivation, r ≈ .60 to .75), while subscales at conceptual antipodes displayed strong negative correlations (e.g., Amotivation correlated negatively with Intrinsic Motivation, r = -.40 to -.55). This ordered progression confirms that the instrument effectively captures a continuous latent dimension of self-determination.
Convergent and Criterion Validity
Extensive studies have demonstrated strong convergent validity between the BREQ-2 subscales and objective physical activity metrics, stage of change classifications within the Transtheoretical Model (TTM), and basic psychological need satisfaction:
- Stages of Change Concordance: Cross-sectional investigations demonstrate that individuals in the Precontemplation stage score highest on Amotivation, individuals in the Contemplation and Preparation stages show prominent spikes in External and Introjected Regulation, whereas individuals in the Action and Maintenance stages demonstrate statistically superior Identified and Intrinsic Regulation scores.
- Behavioral Adherence: Longitudinal tracking indicates that baseline autonomous regulations (Identified and Intrinsic) measured via the BREQ-2 reliably predict exercise program attendance and weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) across 6- and 12-month follow-up assessments (p < .001).
- Basic Needs Correlation: Autonomous BREQ-2 subscales correlate robustly and positively with validated scales assessing autonomy (r > .45), competence (r > .55), and relatedness satisfaction in exercise contexts.
Discriminant Validity
Multitrait-multimethod and average variance extracted (AVE) analyses verify that each of the five factors maintains distinct variance from the others. For each subscale, the AVE estimates consistently exceed the square of the inter-factor correlations (Fornell-Larcker criterion), confirming that Amotivation, External Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Identified Regulation, and Intrinsic Regulation operate as psychometrically distinct constructs.
Reliability
The BREQ-2 exhibits exemplary internal consistency and temporal stability across diverse populations, age brackets, and cultural adaptations.
Internal Consistency
In Markland and Tobin’s (2004) initial validation sample, the Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficients for all five subscales substantially surpassed the accepted psychometric standard of .70:
- Amotivation (4 items): α = .83
- External Regulation (4 items): α = .79
- Introjected Regulation (3 items): α = .80
- Identified Regulation (4 items): α = .73
- Intrinsic Regulation (4 items): α = .86
Subsequent psychometric adaptations—including Spanish, Portuguese, Greek, Turkish, Chinese, and French versions—have consistently replicated these reliability benchmarks, with composite reliability (CR) coefficients typically ranging between .75 and .89 across subscales.
Test-Retest Stability
Investigations evaluating test-retest reliability across intervals of two to four weeks in stable adult populations have documented intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and stability coefficients between .78 and .89, demonstrating that the scale yields temporally dependable scores when situational behavioral contexts remain unperturbed.
Factor Analysis
The structural dimensionality of the BREQ-2 was established primarily through rigorous Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) utilizing maximum likelihood and robust asymptotic estimation techniques (such as the Satorra-Bentler scaled chi-square) to accommodate multivariate non-normality.
CFA Model Fit and Factor Loadings
In the original 2004 calibration analysis by Markland and Tobin, an oblique five-factor measurement model was tested against competing theoretical structures (including single-factor and hierarchical models). The hypothesized five-factor oblique model yielded excellent goodness-of-fit indices:
- Satorra-Bentler Scaled χ² (142, N = 377): 282.88 (p < .001)
- Comparative Fit Index (CFI): .95
- Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): .051 (90% CI: .043 – .060)
- Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): .054
All standardized factor loadings loaded significantly (p < .001) onto their specified latent factors, with standardized parameters generally exceeding .60 (ranging from .52 to .86). Specifically, the four newly introduced amotivation items demonstrated strong, unequivocal standardized loadings (Item 5 = .68, Item 9 = .82, Item 12 = .83, Item 19 = .69), establishing amotivation as an independent, statistically robust factor without detrimental cross-loadings onto external or introjected regulation.
Measurement Invariance
Extensive multigroup CFA studies have established full metric and scalar measurement invariance across genders (men vs. women), age strata (young adults vs. older adults), and health conditions (healthy adults vs. cardiovascular/diabetic clinical populations). This allows researchers to validly compare latent mean differences across demographic and clinical groups without confounding measurement bias.
Instrument / Measurement Tool
- Test Name: Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2 (BREQ-2)
- Construct Measured: Behavioral regulation along the self-determination continuum within the exercise domain
- Test Format: Self-administered paper-and-pencil or computerized psychological questionnaire
- Item Count: 19 items
- Response Scale: 5-point Likert scale formatted as:
- 0 = Not true for me
- 1 = Rarely true for me
- 2 = Sometimes true for me
- 3 = Often true for me
- 4 = Very true for me
- Subscale Item Distributions:
- Amotivation: 4 items (Items 5, 9, 12, 19)
- External Regulation: 4 items (Items 1, 6, 11, 16)
- Introjected Regulation: 3 items (Items 2, 7, 13)
- Identified Regulation: 4 items (Items 3, 8, 14, 17)
- Intrinsic Regulation: 4 items (Items 4, 10, 15, 18)
- Scoring Procedures:
- Subscale Mean Scores: Calculate the mean score of the corresponding items for each subscale by summing item responses and dividing by the number of items in that subscale (yielding a score ranging from 0 to 4 for each regulation).
- Relative Autonomy Index (RAI): A single composite score reflecting overall degree of self-determination can be computed using the weighted theoretical formula:
RAI = (-3 * Amotivation) + (-2 * External) + (-1 * Introjected) + (2 * Identified) + (3 * Intrinsic)
Higher positive values on the RAI reflect greater overall autonomous self-determination, whereas lower or negative values denote higher non-self-determination and controlled motivation.
Permissions & Fee and Test Year
The Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire-2 was officially published in 2004 by David Markland and Vicki J. Tobin. It was designed as an open-access, non-commercial psychological assessment instrument for academic, scientific, and educational research purposes.
No licensing fees or formal written permissions are required to utilize the BREQ-2 for academic, scientific, or institutional clinical research, provided that appropriate scholarly attribution and standard citation are given to the original authors (Markland & Tobin, 2004; Mullan et al., 1997). Commercial organizations, proprietary wellness platforms, and fee-charging clinical entities intending to embed the BREQ-2 within commercial software systems or monetized programs should seek guidance directly from the primary author, Dr. David Markland, at Bangor University.
References
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Markland, D., & Tobin, V. (2004). A modification to the Behavioural Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 26(2), 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.26.2.191
Mullan, E., Markland, D., & Ingledew, D. K. (1997). A graded conceptualisation of self-determination in the regulation of exercise behaviour: Development of a measure using confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 23(5), 745–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(97)00107-4
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press. https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28769
Wilson, P. M., Rodgers, W. M., Loitz, C. C., & Scime, G. (2006). “It’s who I am… really!” The importance of an integrated regulation of exercise behaviour. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 11(2), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9861.2006.tb00021.x